"Critique Sheets At The Fair"

[Roger Fisher]

Areas shown will receive detailed comments later.  Should have posted on original 'critique sheets at the fair' thread.  Sorry (Can't fight with the daughter in law!  She posted the photos...

Since I challlenged others to show their projects and their 'errors'  I just 'had' to post mine......First photo - Triggers "4 pts no reason listed or checked off ? Can you see a problem???   btw the sett trikkers work...   I'm in the dark on this one.

#2 Entry thimble gaps 2 pts
# 3 Lock Not inlet deep enough!!  2 pts    Where's the problem?
#4 & 7  Tang "Inlet too deep"  I swear taking her from an A/C basement and standing her at the fair in that hot humid shed swelled her a tad. At it's worse I could barely catch a finger nail on the stock beside said tang...2 pts

#5 Butt plate 1 pt no reason marked or checked and no notes

#6 Frt sight - dovetail doesn't fit properly "gap'  can't find a gap in dovetail but blade is off the barrel flat 2 pts...  Also I do see a spot I missed with the browning...

Upper and lower forearm upper is marked 'not symmetrical' the lower does have a problem must examine the upper again.  2 pts each.

  Trigger guard - 3 pts 'should have been moved back'  "not inlet correctly"  - I can't see a problem  there;  but the judges did (seems like)  Can you enlighten me by the photos??  Again btw the sett triggers work and rear trigger clears the bow..

  So, the new lady was picked upon and picked apart; but I love her just the same regardless of her gaps her warts and her faults.   Now to make a shooter out of her!!

  ALL remarks - advice - etc gratefully appreciated...  and welcomed.   We all are grateful for the judges expertise and work.  It's what the fair should be all about......

btw she is not a copy of a Gillespie but partly a Gillespie via the butt and the trilkker guard the rest was all my idea.      That mark on rear area of the lock moulding is dust not damage.....

[jwh1947]

Gee, apparently a sensitive topic, judged by the number of hits divided by the number of responses...zero.  OK, bigmouth will take a stab, only in anticipation of a judge maybe adding something to enlighten us all.  

First, that little protrusion of edge brass at the beginning of the flange on your rear entry pipe.  The judges are not going to like that; it is one of the things they look for.  It shows them what you know about doing that job correctly.  That can be improved on your gun.

As for the lock not being inlet deeply enough, I've heard the same thing in the past on their reports, but, standing before me right now is a pristine example by one of the world's finest makers, and it is inlet shallower than yours is.  Truthfully, I don't know.

Yes, I see butt plate gaps.  Standard thing they look for, and it's usually easy to find something to criticize.  Hint: Use a soft alloy casting like Reaves' and then you can "cheat" after your best wood to brass fit by peening the edge with a hammer prior to final filing.  I don't even anneal it usually.  You'll save a few points this way.  

There appears to be a gap to the rear of the dovetail on the front sight.  That can be corrected, and, yes, file off those overhangs of the dovetail and get a little browning on the white spots you missed.  If you have room on your rear sight to lower the front sight profile and still have an appropriate zero, then lower the blade and round it a bit.  

Trigger guard inlet.  Part of the Dixon's judges' formula for low-point-loss on the sheet is no brass showing below the wood at the contact point seen from the profile.  I've heard waffling on this over the years; that is , "just a tiny bit showing," to the "none showing" position.

 The judges themselves need to clarify some of these details, and if they are not computer literate I volunteer to do it for them.  All they need to do is call me.  I'm in the books.  

[California Kid]

Roger, I wouldn't pay any attention to what they say. I'm glad they recruited Acer, at least he knows what he is looking at. I remember one year a gun that got best of show in the master class had ted cash thimbles and stamped inlays. I'm with Jim Kibler, who stated in another thread that he had no desire to enter a gun. I've always enjoyed the fair itself, but the judging part of it leaves a lot to be desired. You can learn more by walking around talking to people than you can from those lousy critique sheets. The seminars are worthwhile as well. So Roger shoot your gun and enjoy it, and don't trip as the kids say!!

[bgf]

Roger,
I liked that rifle when you posted it, and the judges' opinion doesn't change that at all.  I see where they have a point or two -- entry pipe and buttplate for example, but the overall design and execution is pleasant to look at, and it looks like a real rifle.  On the trigger guard, I think the issue the judges had was that your triggers are relatively far back in the bow and they thought you should have moved the whole guard back so there is more space behind the rear trigger -- I'm saying this so that someone who knows can give the correct account.  The problem I have with that judgement -- if I'm correct -- is that it is sometimes nice to have the triggers set back a bit in terms of use, for those of us with fat fingers .

[jwh1947]

...and I forgot to mention that the overall gun is nice and that all those supposed points I mentioned are relatively picayune and superfluous, so the entire drift above makes sense to me, too.

[Pete G.]

It is the judges' job to find something to critique. The better the overall rifle the more petty the judging. Based on that, I'd say you've done a pretty good job. It is my understanding that Dixon's is supposed to be more of a builder's critique than a competition anyway, so I would say that you came out OK. If you look at any handmade product long enough you will find abberations. Whether these should be interpreted as flaws or not is up to the observer I suppose.

[Roger Fisher]

Roger, I wouldn't pay any attention to what they say. I'm glad they recruited Acer, at least he knows what he is looking at. I remember one year a gun that got best of show in the master class had ted cash thimbles and stamped inlays. I'm with Jim Kibler, who stated in another thread that he had no desire to enter a gun. I've always enjoyed the fair itself, but the judging part of it leaves a lot to be desired. You can learn more by walking around talking to people than you can from those lousy critique sheets. The seminars are worthwhile as well. So Roger shoot your gun and enjoy it, and don't trip as the kids say!!

Hey Cal-- If I train this young lady into my shooter, what will become of all the other gals in the gun racks...who are waiting in line...

[Leatherbelly]

Judging?...whatever! It's a real nice rifle. Fix a few little glitches and shoot the be-devil out of her. I like tapered RR's and I think this gun would too.Seems to fill the gap under the nosecap and give 'er a flared look. Be cool to see a profile look Rog.

Oh, you'll have to set the smoothie down for a while till you get this girl trained!

[David Rase]

# 3 Lock Not inlet deep enough!!  2 pts    Where's the problem?
 

I see their problem with the lock inlet.  The 45 degree angle on the lock plate should rise out even with the lock panel.  I see some flat between the lock panel and the bevel.  I normally inlet my locks about 1/16" into the panel, I was taught that from John Bivins, and then refile my 45 degree bevel until it intersewcts the lock panel.  Nice looking gal overall.
DMR

[Shovelbuck]

Great looking piece! Just wondering, are the guns being judged assigned a number without builders name, or are  the builders name known to the judges?

[Eric Fleisher]

The guns are assigned a number and the builders name is covered during the judging.

[Shovelbuck]

Thank you.

[jwh1947]

The repeatedly discussed "Dixon's Dilemma."  If you would have rather submitted a "poor boy" without a butt plate and a rear pipe, maybe your point deductions would have had you as a best-of-show contender.    

[Mike Brooks]

The repeatedly discussed "Dixon's Dilemma."  If you would have rather submitted a "poor boy" without a butt plate and a rear pipe, maybe your point deductions would have had you as a best-of-show contender.    

That's what I figure. Maybe eliminate the side plate and trigger guard too!

[Don Getz]

I have attended just about every Dixon's fair, with the exception of two times, have built about 85 guns, and I have never
entered a gun into the judging.    I think the judging is a good instructional tool, especially for the novice builder.  I would
be curious as to how they would have judged Bill Shipman's Nicholas Hawk rifle?   To me it looked flawless, even better
than the orignal that he copied.............Don

[Mike R]

They apparently hold modern builders to a higher standard than the old timer's.

[Berks Liberty]

Just standing back and looking at all of the rifles I can see that it would be kind of overwhelming for the judges to get through all of them in a couple of days.  I thought about entering my recent build this year but decided not to.  I think I would get a more personal result of my build if I had an experienced builder look it over and pick it apart on a 1 to 1 basis.  I have to hand it to the judges, I wouldn't want to do it!   

Jason

[Roger Fisher]

The repeatedly discussed "Dixon's Dilemma."  If you would have rather submitted a "poor boy" without a butt plate and a rear pipe, maybe your point deductions would have had you as a best-of-show contender.    

That's what I figure. Maybe eliminate the side plate and trigger guard too!

Yeah/yes but,,,, that would be an illgotten gain (I'm sure that has been thought of b/4!!

[Roger Fisher]

Gee, apparently a sensitive topic, judged by the number of hits divided by the number of responses...zero.  OK, bigmouth will take a stab, only in anticipation of a judge maybe adding something to enlighten us all.  

First, that little protrusion of edge brass at the beginning of the flange on your rear entry pipe.  The judges are not going to like that; it is one of the things they look for.  It shows them what you know about doing that job correctly.  That can be improved on your gun.

As for the lock not being inlet deeply enough, I've heard the same thing in the past on their reports, but, standing before me right now is a pristine example by one of the world's finest makers, and it is inlet shallower than yours is.  Truthfully, I don't know.

Yes, I see butt plate gaps.  Standard thing they look for, and it's usually easy to find something to criticize.  Hint: Use a soft alloy casting like Reaves' and then you can "cheat" after your best wood to brass fit by peening the edge with a hammer prior to final filing.  I don't even anneal it usually.  You'll save a few points this way.  

There appears to be a gap to the rear of the dovetail on the front sight.  That can be corrected, and, yes, file off those overhangs of the dovetail and get a little browning on the white spots you missed.  If you have room on your rear sight to lower the front sight profile and still have an appropriate zero, then lower the blade and round it a bit.  

Trigger guard inlet.  Part of the Dixon's judges' formula for low-point-loss on the sheet is no brass showing below the wood at the contact point seen from the profile.  I've heard waffling on this over the years; that is , "just a tiny bit showing," to the "none showing" position.

 The judges themselves need to clarify some of these details, and if they are not computer literate I volunteer to do it for them.  All they need to do is call me.  I'm in the books.  

Jeez, I know the photos are not so hot; but just pointing our this new lady is steel mounted.....

[Roger Fisher]

They apparently hold modern builders to a higher standard than the old timer's.

I happen to have an original J. Ferree which would never 'make the cut'..

[smart dog]

Hi Roger and friends,
Your idea, Roger, to post score sheets was a good one and I think it allows the rest of us to see what details some of our hardest and very knowledgeable peers look at.  I think that is healthy.  I am a scientist, and much of my professional life involves throwing my work out there to the wolf pack for review.  Consequently, I have a thick skin but also a healthy respect for the process and I am always eventually grateful for even the harshest review because my work gets better.  I always improve because of the process, and hopefully, I will always need improvement because perfection would be so boring.  Anyway, we discuss Dixon's judging every year and the same issues come up.  Why did they take off for that, or they don't like my style, or J. P. Beck would never have made the cut......  The discussion often devolves from a healthy one about scoring details into complaints about the judging.  The bottom line is the judges have to establish a pecking order for a big batch of beautiful guns.  That means extremely minor infractions or a style that subjectively does not appeal to a judge matters.  It has too, somebody has to win if the event is intended to acknowledge the (subjective) best in a great lot.  I am just grateful that a group of good people are willing to be judges and create such an event at all.

dave 

[Roger Fisher]

# 3 Lock Not inlet deep enough!!  2 pts    Where's the problem?
 

I see their problem with the lock inlet.  The 45 degree angle on the lock plate should rise out even with the lock panel.  I see some flat between the lock panel and the bevel.  I normally inlet my locks about 1/16" into the panel, I was taught that from John Bivins, and then refile my 45 degree bevel until it intersewcts the lock panel.  Nice looking gal overall.
DMR

Good advice Dave.  Thanks for that tip others thank you also...

[jwh1947]

Let's face it.  It is consistent with a Pa. Dutch county fair, just uniquely focused on our interests and lots more fun.  Not to mention that if it were not financially important to both the operators and the vendors, it would no longer be.  

It is an important local event and the Dixons and their staff are to be commended.  Well organized and maintenance of an ambiance that is an overall great time.
The formula seems to be working for everybody.

Every county fair in these parts has a pie contest.  Mostly for ladies, but no one would object if a man enters a pie.  So it is with Dixons, but here it's just a few guys judging guns rather than pies, gratis, and it all boils down to two things... presentation and taste.

All joking aside, if one were to be able to compile a collection of evaluation sheets from numerous entrants, then study them, most likely the trends of the judges' focus would reveal strong patterns.  Considering that the procedure boils down to a negative, or point-off for flaws methodology, this could easily be quantified.  This would yield the judicial expectations for the perfect pie or rifle, depending on what is being judged.  If they were to photocopy all the sheets for, say 5 years, make a compendium, this would quickly reveal their recipe.  

My guess, and this is only unsubstantiated conjecture, is that the senior judges look first at architecture, flow, gracefulness, and in traditional class, conformity to judges' interpretation of the school.  If a piece passes this test, it is examined more closely for workmanship and hand skills.  A piece that passes all that is likely set aside with a couple others that are really neat rifles.  At that point it is just like the pies...a matter of taste.  It is beyond discussion, other than flavor.  

[Mike Brooks]

Well, never been to Dixon's but hope to one day.  It seems to be a great event, it's disappointing all the good stuff is out east. I have always said I'd never enter a gun there and probably will always stick to that. Unless.......I get to critique my entry in front of the judges, then let them critique it. Then I want a rebuttal session for anything they find that I didn't point out. 

[bama]

I have never built a perfect gun and probably never will. I learn something new on every one that I build. One sure way to see places that can be improved upon is to take pictures of the rifle. When I do this I see every flaw. The judges are seeing these rifles with a fresh set of eyes and probably they see the things we builders have been looking at for months and have acepted in our minds as OK and will be fixed on the next build. I think judging is like umpiring, if people don't like your call you are an a$$ if they do your are the best thing since sliced bread.
I have never been to Dixon's but would like to go, it sounds like a great time. The way I look at entering a rifle would be maybe I will learn something and maybe not but I would never know without trying. Shoot if I was worring about making a mistake I never would get anything built. So build it, shoot it, and go make another what could be better than that!